CAR Central African Republic: Fragile, failed and forlorn

[jmm99]

1. Should "anyone" be doing "something" about the CAR; and, if so,

2. Who is that "anyone" who should be doing "something"; and what is that "something" ?

That country is at least known to me. My aunt, a missionary, served pre-WWII and post-WWII "tours" in the CAR (when it was the Ubangi-Chari area of French Equatorial Africa) at Fort Crampel (now Kaga Bandoro in the Gribingui prefecture), roughly 300 km NNE of Bangui:



Another important question to me is why the CAR (Wiki) has had "a long history post-independence of tyranny" ? Integral to that question is what was its pre-colonial history of governance - and of exploitation by its northern and eastern neighbors (mostly Islamic), especially with respect to the slave trade ? If the area has had a centuries-old tradition of rule by "strong men", "Western democratic" interveners will have a very rough row to hoe (IMO).

As KJ has reminded us many times: look to the ethnicities and religions. So, from the Wiki:

The nation is divided into over 80 ethnic groups, each having its own language. ... Fifty percent of the population of CAR are Christians (Protestant 25%, Roman Catholic 25%), while 35% of the population maintain indigenous beliefs. Islam is practiced by 15% of the country's population.

From what little pre-colonial history I found, Ubangi-Chari was dominated by the adjacent Islamic states to its north and east. The seeds for an ethno-religious conflict are certainly there.

Finally, KJ has also noted the relationship of Boko Haram to the former Kanem, Bornu and Kanem-Bornu empires:



This map shows the farthest extent of the medieval Kanem-Bornu state.

Thus, Boko Haram has its "modern" Islamist aspect; but also a "nationalistic" aspect (based on the medieval empires) and an ethnic aspect (the Kanuri people), as well. I'm reminded of the Pashtuns of Astan and Pstan.

Regards

Mike

[davidbfpo]

JMM99 asked:

1. Should "anyone" be doing "something" about the CAR; and, if so,

2. Who is that "anyone" who should be doing "something"; and what is that "something" ?

Yes, the "anyone" should be African only, maybe with non-African financial, logistic and other support. If Africa thinks it is a problem for them, a moot question, there are some who have the means.

The "something" is to restrain the 'men of violence' who currently are on a looting plus spree. The first step in 'peacemaking' and some form of settlement, even if that means one day partition - South Sudan took a long time to get independence.

Easy from a faraway armchair.

[KingJaja]

Davidbfpo,

The more important question should be - "is the established post-colonial order, which the Central African Republic represents sustainable, if not, then why not allow the natural order to prevail"?

Read me, I've kept on insisting that most African states are not nations but ex-colonial administrative units. There's no point beating around the bush or wasting time.

What if a similar situation occurs in a really big state like Nigeria - who will intervene?

[jmm99]

1. What is the "natural order" in the CAR, a small nation of ~5 million people with ~90 ethnicities ?

2. What is the "natural order" in Nigeria, a large nation of ~180 million people with ~250-500 ethnicities ?

Regards

Mike

[davidbfpo]

Davidbfpo,

The more important question should be - "is the established post-colonial order, which the Central African Republic represents sustainable, if not, then why not allow the natural order to prevail"?

Read me, I've kept on insisting that most African states are not nations but ex-colonial administrative units. There's no point beating around the bush or wasting time.

I agree that Africa is burdened with 'ex-colonial administrative units', but am unsure if anyone knows what the 'natural order' is. Surely that 'order' will take time to evolve, until that presumably happy state is achieved, what should those outside CAR do? My focus is on the safety of the unarmed civilians caught up in the situation today.

I'd rather leave alone Nigeria's future here, but do recall some of scenes from your own civil war long ago. The people of CAR have not had a happy, let alone natural order for a long time - all from a comfortable armchair far away.

[Bill Moore]

I agree that Africa is burdened with 'ex-colonial administrative units', but am unsure if anyone knows what the 'natural order' is. Surely that 'order' will take time to evolve, until that presumably happy state is achieved, what should those outside CAR do? My focus is on the safety of the unarmed civilians caught up in the situation today.

I'd rather leave alone Nigeria's future here, but do recall some of scenes from your own civil war long ago. The people of CAR have not had a happy, let alone natural order for a long time - all from a comfortable armchair far away.

How can it evolve if outsiders intervene to maintain the status quo?

[davidbfpo]

How can it evolve if outsiders intervene to maintain the status quo?

Bill,

Touche!

As I said my focus is on the safety of the unarmed civilians caught up in the situation today. Intervention in my day-dreaming would hardly maintain the status quo; rather create - hopefully - a period of less violence, even calm. Then perhaps new relationships, even borders might be reached. From my early reading (cited Post 1) it appeared that CAR already had communal differences, just that the CAR state didn't see them as borders.

All maybe hopelessly optimistic, too many maybe's.

[Bill Moore]

Bill,

Touche!

As I said my focus is on the safety of the unarmed civilians caught up in the situation today. Intervention in my day-dreaming would hardly maintain the status quo; rather create - hopefully - a period of less violence, even calm. Then perhaps new relationships, even borders might be reached. From my early reading (cited Post 1) it appeared that CAR already had communal differences, just that the CAR state didn't see them as borders.

All maybe hopelessly optimistic, too many maybe's.

David,

I didn't consider my comment touche or emotional at all, but it was a simple statement with deep meaning. How do we expect Africa to evolve in a way that will eventually result in an acceptable norm for them that is relatively peaceful if we keep intervening to maintain the status quo.

I suspect most of us the West have concerns with unarmed civilians getting killed in any conflict, we definitely killed quite a few ourselves in our recent conflicts and tens of thousands of them during WWII, so is that really a criteria for intervention? Sounds like R2P and the CNN effect all over again, and while not discounting it, since this is principally a conflict between peoples not states, does being unarmed mean you're not a target (to the belligerents)?

I'm not taking a stand one way or the other, I only have a limited familiarity with CAR, but I'm exploring our assumptions for intervention. Short term we may save lives, longer term I'm not so sure.